• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

The case for Ty Gregorak

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ty should be auditioning for the head coaching job every week, not just Griz-Cat week. His road auditions haven't gone real well.
 
reinell30 said:
I agree with a lot that is said. However, Mr. Haslam will hire the candidate that he feels fits the best. If it is Ty, sobeit! For the people on this board, it doesn't matter who gets hired, there will be a lot of bitching and complaining. Until a coach is in position and wins big games, bitching and moaning will transpire on this site. I for one am just sitting back waiting for the announcement at seasons end. For now, I will watch this mighty Griz team make a run for frisco!
Click to expand...
What he said ... :thumb:

Now ... Technically :eek:ff:
Whenever we see -- as we did against the kitties -- a full team effort from "our" Griz guys, I get a rush of optimism. (Note, they are "our" team, but I try, not always successfully, to avoid saying "we" unless I am only referring to "we the fans." "We" are not the team, no matter how much "we" might like to think that way.)

Anyway, I see a lot of "team talent" in these young men, which they flashed on Saturday. Yes, the team has some individual stars (Wags, JJ when he's hot, Canada, Van, etc.) ... but winning football games truly is a team effort. Are there areas for improvement? Of course, the O-Line being perhaps the most likely. They look like they're learning their assignments/reads and how to work together. Give them more time to improve that, and "bulk up," and they will get even better. Next year, they could become an outstanding group. When they play with intensity and focus, they're damn good right now.

That goes, in general, for the entire team. I've posted on here a lot by now. Most of you know I'm not a particularly "maroon colored glasses" poster. We (my wife and I) have watched a lot of FCS football this years -- including most of the top teams. (Not all, sadly. :( ) If (a big if, admittedly) this bunch can play with something approaching the intensity and focus they showed against our big rival, I truly believe this team has the talent to win a national championship this year.
 
Spanky said:
This debate is great. My only concern is that we do a national search that is a true honest national search. Does anyone know if the search has started?
Click to expand...

Spanky,

As others have mentioned, I think "national search" means different things to different people. In this case, it sounds like Haslam is putting together a list of names with input from his various contacts (including people who express an interest), and will gradually whittle that down to a short list of people that he will interview. I suspect some people on that list may be coaching games in upcoming weeks, so I'd guess there will be an announcement shortly after the Griz season ends. I would also guess that we won't hear many details, if any, before the selection is made.

Anybody else have insights?
 
Just to put Gregorak's defense in a context bigger than best in the Big Sky. Because best in the Big Sky is kind of like being the tallest midget.

RUSHING DEFENSE

Rank Team G Rsh Net Avg TD Ydspgpg
1. Bethune-Cookman 12 370 959 2.59 9 79.9
2. Wagner 11 367 914 2.49 9 83.1
3. Sacred Heart 11 395 947 2.40 6 86.1
4. Harvard 10 321 868 2.70 8 86.8
5. North Dakota 12 461 1230 2.67 12 102.5
6. Norfolk St. 12 465 1232 2.65 8 102.7
7. UNI 12 427 1236 2.89 17 103.0
8. Princeton 10 360 1043 2.90 10 104.3
9. Villanova 12 399 1279 3.21 15 106.6
10. Wofford 11 392 1182 3.02 19 107.5
11. Bucknell 11 390 1186 3.04 19 107.8
12. Alcorn 12 419 1296 3.09 10 108.0
13. North Dakota St. 12 374 1304 3.49 8 108.7
14. Butler 11 385 1218 3.16 9 110.7
15. Southeastern La. 12 460 1346 2.93 14 112.2
16. McNeese St. 11 367 1238 3.37 10 112.5
17. Stony Brook 12 417 1366 3.28 9 113.8
18. Marist 11 426 1264 2.97 12 114.9
19. Jacksonville St. 11 393 1291 3.28 10 117.4
20. Illinois St. 11 405 1307 3.23 10 118.8
21. Drake 11 380 1366 3.59 14 124.2
22. South Carolina St. 12 451 1498 3.32 14 124.8
23. Richmond 12 410 1514 3.69 18 126.2
24. N.C. A&T 12 444 1566 3.53 10 130.5
25. Bryant 11 389 1440 3.70 12 130.9
26. Brown 10 335 1312 3.92 15 131.2
27. Chattanooga 12 471 1615 3.43 18 134.6
28. Jacksonville 11 421 1500 3.56 11 136.4
29. Western Ill. 12 426 1669 3.92 19 139.1
30. Charleston So. 12 395 1687 4.27 14 140.6
31. Duquesne 12 458 1701 3.71 14 141.8
32. Dartmouth 10 355 1424 4.01 15 142.4
33. Maine 11 430 1590 3.70 14 144.5
34. Colgate 12 442 1745 3.95 15 145.4
35. Yale 10 340 1455 4.28 16 145.5
36. New Hampshire 11 402 1609 4.00 16 146.3
37. William & Mary 12 410 1783 4.35 17 148.6
38. Tennessee St. 12 508 1799 3.54 19 149.9
39. Montana Gregorak 12 474 1800 3.80 14 150.0

Passing Defense

Rank Team G Com Att Yds TD Ydspg
1. Samford 11 153 272 1530 6 139.1
2. Morgan St. 12 177 327 1697 12 141.4
3. North Dakota St. 12 181 345 1762 7 146.8
4. Chattanooga 12 157 276 1766 12 147.2
5. Norfolk St. 12 133 278 1783 12 148.6
6. Fordham 12 161 322 1819 18 151.6
7. Tennessee St. 12 164 317 1840 11 153.3
8. Bethune-Cookman 12 167 347 1891 19 157.6
9. Stony Brook 12 173 329 1914 10 159.5
10. Bryant 11 155 315 1859 9 169.0
11. Lafayette 11 146 287 1860 16 169.1
12. Delaware St. 12 200 308 2050 18 170.8
13. Maine 11 161 322 1894 12 172.2
14. Saint Francis (PA) 11 163 326 1926 22 175.1
15. Furman 12 162 276 2114 20 176.2
16. Western Caro. 12 155 302 2117 14 176.4
17. Northern Ariz. 12 171 312 2122 15 176.8
18. Mercer 12 175 307 2130 14 177.5
19. N.C. Central 12 189 335 2132 16 177.7
20. South Dakota St. 12 190 342 2161 13 180.1
21. Central Conn. St. 12 188 341 2176 22 181.3
22. Southeastern La. 12 200 392 2196 11 183.0
23. Duquesne 12 189 355 2206 14 183.8
24. Charleston So. 12 168 294 2221 18 185.1
25. N.C. A&T 12 198 391 2240 10 186.7
26. Lamar 12 197 386 2256 20 188.0
27. Sacred Heart 11 168 348 2076 18 188.7
28. Dayton 11 203 376 2079 16 189.0
29. Robert Morris 11 150 280 2081 17 189.2
30. Presbyterian 11 166 291 2088 17 189.8

72. Tennessee Tech 12 239 360 2657 20 221.4
73. Montana --Gregorak 12 236 389 2660 13 221.7

Total defense

TOTAL DEFENSE

Rank Team G Pl Yds Avg TD Ydspg
1. Bethune-Cookman 12 717 2850 3.97 31 237.5
2. Norfolk St. 12 743 3015 4.06 24 251.3
3. North Dakota St. 12 719 3066 4.26 16 255.5
4. Stony Brook 12 746 3280 4.40 21 273.3
5. Sacred Heart 11 743 3023 4.07 26 274.8
6. Wagner 11 708 3094 4.37 26 281.3
7. Chattanooga 12 747 3381 4.53 30 281.8
8. Southeastern La. 12 852 3542 4.16 27 295.2
9. Bryant 11 704 3299 4.69 22 299.9
10. UNI 12 818 3619 4.42 30 301.6
11. Bucknell 11 717 3326 4.64 31 302.4
12. Tennessee St. 12 825 3639 4.41 36 303.3
13. Harvard 10 705 3065 4.35 15 306.5
14. Jacksonville St. 11 729 3407 4.67 27 309.7
15. Samford 11 762 3440 4.51 28 312.7
16. Maine 11 752 3484 4.63 29 316.7
17. N.C. A&T 12 835 3806 4.56 21 317.2
18. Drake 11 704 3498 4.97 29 318.0
19. Illinois St. 11 745 3516 4.72 27 319.6
20. Alcorn 12 827 3889 4.70 29 324.1
21. Duquesne 12 813 3907 4.81 31 325.6
22. Charleston So. 12 689 3908 5.67 33 325.7
23. Fordham 12 813 3916 4.82 33 326.3
24. Marist 11 804 3609 4.49 27 328.1
25. Wofford 11 707 3627 5.13 31 329.7
26. McNeese St. 11 728 3632 4.99 31 330.2
27. Richmond 12 789 3985 5.05 37 332.1
28. South Carolina St. 12 849 3997 4.71 31 333.1
29. Jacksonville 11 782 3684 4.71 25 334.9
30. Saint Francis (PA) 11 723 3709 5.13 42 337.2

50. Montana Gregorak 12 863 4460 5.17 29 371.7


Turnover margin
Gain Loss
Rank Team G Fm Int Tot Fm Int Tot Margin Avg
1. Montana gregorak and Hynson 12 10 13 23 2 5 7 16 1.33
2. Albany (NY) 12 20 10 30 6 9 15 15 1.25
3. Indiana St. 12 15 12 27 7 8 15 12 1.00
3. N.C. A&T 12 15 21 36 16 8 24 12 1.00
3. N.C. Central 12 19 11 30 12 6 18 12 1.00
6. William & Mary 12 13 9 22 7 4 11 11 0.92
6. James Madison 12 12 12 24 6 7 13 11 0.92

PASS EFFICIENCY DEFENSE

Rank Team G Att Com Int Yds TD Pass Eff
1. North Dakota St. 12 345 181 15 1762 7 93.36
2. N.C. A&T 12 391 198 21 2240 10 96.46
3. Southeastern La. 12 392 200 18 2196 11 98.15
4. Jacksonville 11 361 182 24 2184 12 98.91
5. Bryant 11 315 155 14 1859 9 99.32
6. Tennessee St. 12 317 164 16 1840 11 101.85
7. Samford 11 272 153 12 1530 6 101.96
8. Maine 11 322 161 14 1894 12 103.01
9. Stony Brook 12 329 173 12 1914 10 104.19
10. Morgan St. 12 327 177 9 1697 12 104.33
11. Sacred Heart 11 348 168 18 2076 18 105.11
12. Dayton 11 376 203 17 2079 16 105.44
13. Harvard 10 384 225 10 2197 6 106.60
14. Bethune-Cookman 12 347 167 8 1891 19 107.36
15. Fordham 12 322 161 11 1819 18 109.07
16. San Diego 11 389 208 11 2109 19 109.47
17. Wagner 11 341 178 18 2180 15 109.86
18. Lamar 12 386 197 13 2256 20 110.49
19. Duquesne 12 355 189 14 2206 14 110.56
20. Coastal Caro. 12 374 196 11 2384 12 110.66
21. UNI 12 391 229 16 2383 11 110.86
22. New Hampshire 11 374 216 12 2164 13 111.41
23. Alcorn 12 408 220 18 2593 16 111.42
24. Indiana St. 12 403 224 12 2409 15 112.12
25. Norfolk St. 12 278 133 5 1783 12 112.36
26. Saint Francis (PA) 11 326 163 15 1926 22 112.69
27. South Dakota St. 12 342 190 14 2161 13 112.99
28. Illinois St. 11 340 181 14 2209 14 113.16
29. Marist 11 378 222 13 2345 11 113.57
30. Dartmouth 10 401 240 12 2418 11 113.57

51. Montana Gregorak 12 389 236 13 2660 13 122.45

Scoring defense

SCORING DEFENSE

Rank Team G TD OXP 2PT DXP FGM Saf Pts Avg
1. North Dakota St. 12 16 16 0 0 9 0 139 11.6
2. Harvard 10 15 12 0 0 7 0 123 12.3
3. N.C. A&T 12 21 17 0 0 8 0 167 13.9
4. Stony Brook 12 21 15 2 0 13 0 184 15.3
5. Bryant 11 22 20 1 0 7 1 177 16.1
6. Sacred Heart 11 26 20 0 0 2 0 182 16.5
7. Southeastern La. 12 27 22 2 0 7 0 209 17.4
8. Jacksonville 11 25 20 1 0 7 0 193 17.5
9. Norfolk St. 12 24 20 0 0 13 4 211 17.6
10. Wagner 11 26 20 2 0 6 0 198 18.0
11. Coastal Caro. 12 28 22 0 0 10 0 220 18.3
12. Chattanooga 12 30 24 0 0 6 0 222 18.5
13. Illinois St. 11 27 19 2 0 7 1 208 18.9
14. UNI 12 30 27 0 0 7 0 228 19.0
15. Alcorn 12 29 23 2 0 9 1 230 19.2
16. Samford 11 28 26 1 0 7 0 217 19.7
17. Marist 11 27 24 1 0 11 0 221 20.1
18. Montana Gregorak 12 29 25 1 0 14 0 243 20.3
 
Good post. Of course, to really put it in perspective, you'd probably also have to put up the offensive stats of the teams those defenses have faced.
 
Uh no if anyone wants my true opinion PM Hammer he will tell you lol. Not enough for me to see him as head coach . I do think he has been getting better as a Defensive coordinator . Definitely has fire and the players love him. It reminds me of the movie U571 though (Matthew Mcconaughey ) can he be a true leader and make tough decisions , re; the players that love him ( he doesn't have to send them to there death ) . I will have to think on this one see how the next few weeks play out
 
No strong opinion, but I'm pretty sure the first list about rushing defense is actually the rushing offense stats...UND led the conference in rushing defense, no way they are behind Cal Poly and Montana St...
 
granitegriz said:
Ty and new OC would be good :thumb:
Click to expand...

Great! So who does Ty know? Who has he worked with? He's been in the Biz for 12 years, he's surely been exposed to some offensive coaches during that time who know him and would be willing to have him as a boss.
 
griz4life said:
granitegriz said:
Ty and new OC would be good :thumb:
Click to expand...

Great! So who does Ty know? Who has he worked with? He's been in the Biz for 12 years, he's surely been exposed to some offensive coaches during that time who know him and would be willing to have him as a boss.
Click to expand...

Rob Phenecie
 
Everything Brint says is true and, like I posted earlier, I think Ty will get a lot more consideration than Gragg. HOWEVER, the OC thing might be a bit of a pipe dream. Are you guys suggesting that IF TG got the job he would look Scott and Kefense right in the eye and send them packing? I pretty much HIGHLY doubt that would happen.
 
The only thing that will change is a couple positions titles...don't expect different faces to be on the staff next season.
 
havgrizfan said:
Everything Brint says is true and, like I posted earlier, I think Ty will get a lot more consideration than Gragg. HOWEVER, the OC thing might be a bit of a pipe dream. Are you guys suggesting that IF TG got the job he would look Scott and Kefense right in the eye and send them packing? I pretty much HIGHLY doubt that would happen.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what he did to his first wife?
 
griz4life said:
Just to put Gregorak's defense in a context bigger than best in the Big Sky. Because best in the Big Sky is kind of like being the tallest midget.

RUSHING DEFENSE

Rank Team G Rsh Net Avg TD Ydspgpg
1. Bethune-Cookman 12 370 959 2.59 9 79.9
2. Wagner 11 367 914 2.49 9 83.1
3. Sacred Heart 11 395 947 2.40 6 86.1
4. Harvard 10 321 868 2.70 8 86.8
5. North Dakota 12 461 1230 2.67 12 102.5
6. Norfolk St. 12 465 1232 2.65 8 102.7
7. UNI 12 427 1236 2.89 17 103.0
8. Princeton 10 360 1043 2.90 10 104.3
9. Villanova 12 399 1279 3.21 15 106.6
10. Wofford 11 392 1182 3.02 19 107.5
11. Bucknell 11 390 1186 3.04 19 107.8
12. Alcorn 12 419 1296 3.09 10 108.0
13. North Dakota St. 12 374 1304 3.49 8 108.7
14. Butler 11 385 1218 3.16 9 110.7
15. Southeastern La. 12 460 1346 2.93 14 112.2
16. McNeese St. 11 367 1238 3.37 10 112.5
17. Stony Brook 12 417 1366 3.28 9 113.8
18. Marist 11 426 1264 2.97 12 114.9
19. Jacksonville St. 11 393 1291 3.28 10 117.4
20. Illinois St. 11 405 1307 3.23 10 118.8
21. Drake 11 380 1366 3.59 14 124.2
22. South Carolina St. 12 451 1498 3.32 14 124.8
23. Richmond 12 410 1514 3.69 18 126.2
24. N.C. A&T 12 444 1566 3.53 10 130.5
25. Bryant 11 389 1440 3.70 12 130.9
26. Brown 10 335 1312 3.92 15 131.2
27. Chattanooga 12 471 1615 3.43 18 134.6
28. Jacksonville 11 421 1500 3.56 11 136.4
29. Western Ill. 12 426 1669 3.92 19 139.1
30. Charleston So. 12 395 1687 4.27 14 140.6
31. Duquesne 12 458 1701 3.71 14 141.8
32. Dartmouth 10 355 1424 4.01 15 142.4
33. Maine 11 430 1590 3.70 14 144.5
34. Colgate 12 442 1745 3.95 15 145.4
35. Yale 10 340 1455 4.28 16 145.5
36. New Hampshire 11 402 1609 4.00 16 146.3
37. William & Mary 12 410 1783 4.35 17 148.6
38. Tennessee St. 12 508 1799 3.54 19 149.9
39. Montana Gregorak 12 474 1800 3.80 14 150.0

Passing Defense

Rank Team G Com Att Yds TD Ydspg
1. Samford 11 153 272 1530 6 139.1
2. Morgan St. 12 177 327 1697 12 141.4
3. North Dakota St. 12 181 345 1762 7 146.8
4. Chattanooga 12 157 276 1766 12 147.2
5. Norfolk St. 12 133 278 1783 12 148.6
6. Fordham 12 161 322 1819 18 151.6
7. Tennessee St. 12 164 317 1840 11 153.3
8. Bethune-Cookman 12 167 347 1891 19 157.6
9. Stony Brook 12 173 329 1914 10 159.5
10. Bryant 11 155 315 1859 9 169.0
11. Lafayette 11 146 287 1860 16 169.1
12. Delaware St. 12 200 308 2050 18 170.8
13. Maine 11 161 322 1894 12 172.2
14. Saint Francis (PA) 11 163 326 1926 22 175.1
15. Furman 12 162 276 2114 20 176.2
16. Western Caro. 12 155 302 2117 14 176.4
17. Northern Ariz. 12 171 312 2122 15 176.8
18. Mercer 12 175 307 2130 14 177.5
19. N.C. Central 12 189 335 2132 16 177.7
20. South Dakota St. 12 190 342 2161 13 180.1
21. Central Conn. St. 12 188 341 2176 22 181.3
22. Southeastern La. 12 200 392 2196 11 183.0
23. Duquesne 12 189 355 2206 14 183.8
24. Charleston So. 12 168 294 2221 18 185.1
25. N.C. A&T 12 198 391 2240 10 186.7
26. Lamar 12 197 386 2256 20 188.0
27. Sacred Heart 11 168 348 2076 18 188.7
28. Dayton 11 203 376 2079 16 189.0
29. Robert Morris 11 150 280 2081 17 189.2
30. Presbyterian 11 166 291 2088 17 189.8

72. Tennessee Tech 12 239 360 2657 20 221.4
73. Montana --Gregorak 12 236 389 2660 13 221.7

Total defense

TOTAL DEFENSE

Rank Team G Pl Yds Avg TD Ydspg
1. Bethune-Cookman 12 717 2850 3.97 31 237.5
2. Norfolk St. 12 743 3015 4.06 24 251.3
3. North Dakota St. 12 719 3066 4.26 16 255.5
4. Stony Brook 12 746 3280 4.40 21 273.3
5. Sacred Heart 11 743 3023 4.07 26 274.8
6. Wagner 11 708 3094 4.37 26 281.3
7. Chattanooga 12 747 3381 4.53 30 281.8
8. Southeastern La. 12 852 3542 4.16 27 295.2
9. Bryant 11 704 3299 4.69 22 299.9
10. UNI 12 818 3619 4.42 30 301.6
11. Bucknell 11 717 3326 4.64 31 302.4
12. Tennessee St. 12 825 3639 4.41 36 303.3
13. Harvard 10 705 3065 4.35 15 306.5
14. Jacksonville St. 11 729 3407 4.67 27 309.7
15. Samford 11 762 3440 4.51 28 312.7
16. Maine 11 752 3484 4.63 29 316.7
17. N.C. A&T 12 835 3806 4.56 21 317.2
18. Drake 11 704 3498 4.97 29 318.0
19. Illinois St. 11 745 3516 4.72 27 319.6
20. Alcorn 12 827 3889 4.70 29 324.1
21. Duquesne 12 813 3907 4.81 31 325.6
22. Charleston So. 12 689 3908 5.67 33 325.7
23. Fordham 12 813 3916 4.82 33 326.3
24. Marist 11 804 3609 4.49 27 328.1
25. Wofford 11 707 3627 5.13 31 329.7
26. McNeese St. 11 728 3632 4.99 31 330.2
27. Richmond 12 789 3985 5.05 37 332.1
28. South Carolina St. 12 849 3997 4.71 31 333.1
29. Jacksonville 11 782 3684 4.71 25 334.9
30. Saint Francis (PA) 11 723 3709 5.13 42 337.2

50. Montana Gregorak 12 863 4460 5.17 29 371.7


Turnover margin
Gain Loss
Rank Team G Fm Int Tot Fm Int Tot Margin Avg
1. Montana gregorak and Hynson 12 10 13 23 2 5 7 16 1.33
2. Albany (NY) 12 20 10 30 6 9 15 15 1.25
3. Indiana St. 12 15 12 27 7 8 15 12 1.00
3. N.C. A&T 12 15 21 36 16 8 24 12 1.00
3. N.C. Central 12 19 11 30 12 6 18 12 1.00
6. William & Mary 12 13 9 22 7 4 11 11 0.92
6. James Madison 12 12 12 24 6 7 13 11 0.92

PASS EFFICIENCY DEFENSE

Rank Team G Att Com Int Yds TD Pass Eff
1. North Dakota St. 12 345 181 15 1762 7 93.36
2. N.C. A&T 12 391 198 21 2240 10 96.46
3. Southeastern La. 12 392 200 18 2196 11 98.15
4. Jacksonville 11 361 182 24 2184 12 98.91
5. Bryant 11 315 155 14 1859 9 99.32
6. Tennessee St. 12 317 164 16 1840 11 101.85
7. Samford 11 272 153 12 1530 6 101.96
8. Maine 11 322 161 14 1894 12 103.01
9. Stony Brook 12 329 173 12 1914 10 104.19
10. Morgan St. 12 327 177 9 1697 12 104.33
11. Sacred Heart 11 348 168 18 2076 18 105.11
12. Dayton 11 376 203 17 2079 16 105.44
13. Harvard 10 384 225 10 2197 6 106.60
14. Bethune-Cookman 12 347 167 8 1891 19 107.36
15. Fordham 12 322 161 11 1819 18 109.07
16. San Diego 11 389 208 11 2109 19 109.47
17. Wagner 11 341 178 18 2180 15 109.86
18. Lamar 12 386 197 13 2256 20 110.49
19. Duquesne 12 355 189 14 2206 14 110.56
20. Coastal Caro. 12 374 196 11 2384 12 110.66
21. UNI 12 391 229 16 2383 11 110.86
22. New Hampshire 11 374 216 12 2164 13 111.41
23. Alcorn 12 408 220 18 2593 16 111.42
24. Indiana St. 12 403 224 12 2409 15 112.12
25. Norfolk St. 12 278 133 5 1783 12 112.36
26. Saint Francis (PA) 11 326 163 15 1926 22 112.69
27. South Dakota St. 12 342 190 14 2161 13 112.99
28. Illinois St. 11 340 181 14 2209 14 113.16
29. Marist 11 378 222 13 2345 11 113.57
30. Dartmouth 10 401 240 12 2418 11 113.57

51. Montana Gregorak 12 389 236 13 2660 13 122.45

Scoring defense

SCORING DEFENSE

Rank Team G TD OXP 2PT DXP FGM Saf Pts Avg
1. North Dakota St. 12 16 16 0 0 9 0 139 11.6
2. Harvard 10 15 12 0 0 7 0 123 12.3
3. N.C. A&T 12 21 17 0 0 8 0 167 13.9
4. Stony Brook 12 21 15 2 0 13 0 184 15.3
5. Bryant 11 22 20 1 0 7 1 177 16.1
6. Sacred Heart 11 26 20 0 0 2 0 182 16.5
7. Southeastern La. 12 27 22 2 0 7 0 209 17.4
8. Jacksonville 11 25 20 1 0 7 0 193 17.5
9. Norfolk St. 12 24 20 0 0 13 4 211 17.6
10. Wagner 11 26 20 2 0 6 0 198 18.0
11. Coastal Caro. 12 28 22 0 0 10 0 220 18.3
12. Chattanooga 12 30 24 0 0 6 0 222 18.5
13. Illinois St. 11 27 19 2 0 7 1 208 18.9
14. UNI 12 30 27 0 0 7 0 228 19.0
15. Alcorn 12 29 23 2 0 9 1 230 19.2
16. Samford 11 28 26 1 0 7 0 217 19.7
17. Marist 11 27 24 1 0 11 0 221 20.1
18. Montana Gregorak 12 29 25 1 0 14 0 243 20.3
Click to expand...

Shouldn't Scoring Defense be listed at the top. I believe UM ranks 7th in Scoring Defense among the playoff teams.

Also note that the Big Sky is an offensive conference, so defensive stats will be skewed compared to national teams. In points scored, EWU is 1, ISU is 7, SS is 11, MSU is 12 and CP is 23. In Total O, ISU is 2, EWU IS 3, MSUIS 10, cp IS 11 and SS is 12. ISU and EWU and nos. 1 and 2 in passing offense.

UM held EWU to 7.6 below its average, SS to 25.2 below its average, MSU to 21 below its average, and CP got 7.2 over its average. Holding 3 of those teams below their averages, and 2 of them to over 3 TD's below their average is very good.
 
grizindabox said:
The only thing that will change is a couple positions titles...don't expect different faces to be on the staff next season.
Click to expand...
OMG, I hope you are wrong....
 
Hammer said:
griz4life said:
granitegriz said:
Ty and new OC would be good :thumb:
Click to expand...

Great! So who does Ty know? Who has he worked with? He's been in the Biz for 12 years, he's surely been exposed to some offensive coaches during that time who know him and would be willing to have him as a boss.
Click to expand...

Rob Phenecie
Click to expand...
:puke:
 
PlayerRep said:
Shouldn't Scoring Defense be listed at the top. I believe UM ranks 7th in Scoring Defense among the playoff teams.

Also note that the Big Sky is an offensive conference, so defensive stats will be skewed compared to national teams. In points scored, EWU is 1, ISU is 7, SS is 11, MSU is 12 and CP is 23. In Total O, ISU is 2, EWU IS 3, MSUIS 10, cp IS 11 and SS is 12. ISU and EWU and nos. 1 and 2 in passing offense.

UM held EWU to 7.6 below its average, SS to 25.2 below its average, MSU to 21 below its average, and CP got 7.2 over its average. Holding 3 of those teams below their averages, and 2 of them to over 3 TD's below their average is very good.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Montana did not play ISU. So, no ISU does not skew Montana's defensive stats for points scored. The Griz are 18th.

of the playoff teams, Southeast Louisiana also defeated as many top 12 scoring teams and managed to finish even better than the Griz for scoring defense. Perhaps there should be a case for Karl Scott thread.


Rank Team G TD OXP 2PT DXP FGM Saf Pts Avg
1. North Dakota St. 12 16 16 0 0 9 0 139 11.6
2. Harvard 10 15 12 0 0 7 0 123 12.3
3. N.C. A&T 12 21 17 0 0 8 0 167 13.9
4. Stony Brook 12 21 15 2 0 13 0 184 15.3
5. Bryant 11 22 20 1 0 7 1 177 16.1
6. Sacred Heart 11 26 20 0 0 2 0 182 16.5
7. Southeastern La. 12 27 22 2 0 7 0 209 17.4
8. Jacksonville 11 25 20 1 0 7 0 193 17.5
9. Norfolk St. 12 24 20 0 0 13 4 211 17.6
10. Wagner 11 26 20 2 0 6 0 198 18.0
11. Coastal Caro. 12 28 22 0 0 10 0 220 18.3
12. Chattanooga 12 30 24 0 0 6 0 222 18.5
13. Illinois St. 11 27 19 2 0 7 1 208 18.9
14. UNI 12 30 27 0 0 7 0 228 19.0
15. Alcorn 12 29 23 2 0 9 1 230 19.2
16. Samford 11 28 26 1 0 7 0 217 19.7
17. Marist 11 27 24 1 0 11 0 221 20.1
18. Montana Gregorak 12 29 25 1 0 14 0 243 20.3
 
griz4life said:
PlayerRep said:
Shouldn't Scoring Defense be listed at the top. I believe UM ranks 7th in Scoring Defense among the playoff teams.

Also note that the Big Sky is an offensive conference, so defensive stats will be skewed compared to national teams. In points scored, EWU is 1, ISU is 7, SS is 11, MSU is 12 and CP is 23. In Total O, ISU is 2, EWU IS 3, MSUIS 10, cp IS 11 and SS is 12. ISU and EWU and nos. 1 and 2 in passing offense.

UM held EWU to 7.6 below its average, SS to 25.2 below its average, MSU to 21 below its average, and CP got 7.2 over its average. Holding 3 of those teams below their averages, and 2 of them to over 3 TD's below their average is very good.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Montana did not play ISU. So, no ISU does not skew Montana's defensive stats for points scored. The Griz are 18th.

of the playoff teams, Southeast Louisiana also defeated as many top 12 scoring teams and managed to finish even better than the Griz for scoring defense. Perhaps there should be a case for Karl Scott thread.


Rank Team G TD OXP 2PT DXP FGM Saf Pts Avg
1. North Dakota St. 12 16 16 0 0 9 0 139 11.6
2. Harvard 10 15 12 0 0 7 0 123 12.3
3. N.C. A&T 12 21 17 0 0 8 0 167 13.9
4. Stony Brook 12 21 15 2 0 13 0 184 15.3
5. Bryant 11 22 20 1 0 7 1 177 16.1
6. Sacred Heart 11 26 20 0 0 2 0 182 16.5
7. Southeastern La. 12 27 22 2 0 7 0 209 17.4
8. Jacksonville 11 25 20 1 0 7 0 193 17.5
9. Norfolk St. 12 24 20 0 0 13 4 211 17.6
10. Wagner 11 26 20 2 0 6 0 198 18.0
11. Coastal Caro. 12 28 22 0 0 10 0 220 18.3
12. Chattanooga 12 30 24 0 0 6 0 222 18.5
13. Illinois St. 11 27 19 2 0 7 1 208 18.9
14. UNI 12 30 27 0 0 7 0 228 19.0
15. Alcorn 12 29 23 2 0 9 1 230 19.2
16. Samford 11 28 26 1 0 7 0 217 19.7
17. Marist 11 27 24 1 0 11 0 221 20.1
18. Montana Gregorak 12 29 25 1 0 14 0 243 20.3
Click to expand...

You need to learn how to read. Nowhere did I saw UM played ISU.

Yes, SELA beat those powerhouses Lamar and Central Arkansas (6-6). SELA gained its low average from clobbering powers like Incarnate Word, Houston Baptist, Nichols St (winless) and Jacksonville.

Sometimes I wonder of how some of you get through a day of life.
 
gotgame75 said:
I wonder how many of these "Hire Ty" posts we would be seeing right now if we had lost to the Cats or even if it was a close win? This was one game people! I think fans, myself included, tend to get too caught up in the emotion of single game heroics. While this 2014 defense has looked great on the whole, we have also seen this D be very vulnerable at times to giving up big chunks of yards to better offenses (see SUU, EWU, Cal Poly). And some will remember that the 2013 squad, in spite of having some of the best LBs and D-lineman in Griz history, was hardly the statistically dominant unit you would expect from such talent. I think Ty is a great guy and a coach on the rise, but he has definitely not had the sustained level of success you would expect from a coordinator ascending to the HC throne. I just fail to see how Ty's resume, at this point in his career, is even close to on par with most of the possible candidates that've been mentioned so far. Pease has been a successful coordinator at the highest levels of college football for years. Leipold is the fastest coach ever to 100 wins and has won 5 championships in 6 years. We've seen first-hand the success Baldwin has had at Eastern. How does Ty and his relatively short-term success compare with names like these? He doesn't. The best thing Ty has going for him in this race is the loyalty and support of his players, which speaks to his leadership skills. While this should definitely be considered by Haslam, it would be a huge mistake to place too much stock in the views of players that are too emotionally invested in a coach they have won and lost with to be objective. Ty may very well turn out to be a great HC some day, but we are not in a position to be turning down coaches with proven track records in order to gamble on Ty. I mean last year,UM-Western didn't feel Ty was ready to be their coach. But now he is suddenly ready to take the reigns of a much bigger program with loftier expectations? I don't think so. Good luck to Ty and perhaps we'll see him again down the line, but now is just not the time.
Click to expand...

This, in my opinion, is the best and most rational stance. Coach Ty has earned his position as d coordinator, however, his ascension to hc from his current position would be very risky. Take a proven commodity at the hc position and retain TG as DC. That makes perfect sense.
 
hm.grwn.grizfan said:
gotgame75 said:
I wonder how many of these "Hire Ty" posts we would be seeing right now if we had lost to the Cats or even if it was a close win? This was one game people! I think fans, myself included, tend to get too caught up in the emotion of single game heroics. While this 2014 defense has looked great on the whole, we have also seen this D be very vulnerable at times to giving up big chunks of yards to better offenses (see SUU, EWU, Cal Poly). And some will remember that the 2013 squad, in spite of having some of the best LBs and D-lineman in Griz history, was hardly the statistically dominant unit you would expect from such talent. I think Ty is a great guy and a coach on the rise, but he has definitely not had the sustained level of success you would expect from a coordinator ascending to the HC throne. I just fail to see how Ty's resume, at this point in his career, is even close to on par with most of the possible candidates that've been mentioned so far. Pease has been a successful coordinator at the highest levels of college football for years. Leipold is the fastest coach ever to 100 wins and has won 5 championships in 6 years. We've seen first-hand the success Baldwin has had at Eastern. How does Ty and his relatively short-term success compare with names like these? He doesn't. The best thing Ty has going for him in this race is the loyalty and support of his players, which speaks to his leadership skills. While this should definitely be considered by Haslam, it would be a huge mistake to place too much stock in the views of players that are too emotionally invested in a coach they have won and lost with to be objective. Ty may very well turn out to be a great HC some day, but we are not in a position to be turning down coaches with proven track records in order to gamble on Ty. I mean last year,UM-Western didn't feel Ty was ready to be their coach. But now he is suddenly ready to take the reigns of a much bigger program with loftier expectations? I don't think so. Good luck to Ty and perhaps we'll see him again down the line, but now is just not the time.
Click to expand...

This, in my opinion, is the best and most rational stance. Coach Ty has earned his position as d coordinator, however, his ascension to hc from his current position would be very risky. Take a proven commodity at the hc position and retain TG as DC. That makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

Some of us have been suggesting TG all along, and long before the Cat game.

Many of the possible coaches being mentioned are not even interested in UM, or have done nothing more than have an agent or friend contact Haslam. Talk about being unrealistic. We'll see who applies. Baldwin, if he applies, has a proven track record. Many others being mentioned don't have a proven track record in D-I.

TG is a much more known quantity than most of the others being mentioned. My view is that he is not a risky candidate compared to many of the others, so I don't agree that those saying otherwise. A proven head coach is a positive, but can they translate lower level success into success at UM. I'd say watch out for coaches with questionable personalities.

While I have been saying positive things about TG, I am mostly trying to balance and enhance the discussion. I will wait to see who actually is interested and applies. Maybe a number of very strong candidates will apply. We'll see.

I see that Leipold has a bit of Bobby Hauck in him. http://www.jsonline.com/sports/statecolleges/43539347.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top